Saturday, November 04, 2006
Iran: Plus ça change
Twenty-two years ago, a random British woman in Tokyo gave me the poster at right (click to enlarge), allegedly taken from the ladies room wall in a Tehran bus station. It is a call to boycott the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles, and a reminder that the Islamic Republic has been using anti-Americanism as a political device pretty much without interruption since the revolution that brought it to power.
I had thought I had lost the poster, but I found it in an old batch of papers in a box we had been moving from place to place for the better part of a generation (that's the kind of house we keep, I'm afraid). It conjured up the memory of the Englishwoman, and how this poster came into my possession.
In the summer of 1984, after my first year in law school, I decided to backpack around east Asia with a couple of friends rather than take some fool job at a law firm or try to write my way on to the Michigan Law Review, a decision that seemed daring at the time but which has proven to be damned brilliant with the passing of the years. We were in Tokyo staying at the main youth hostel, a beautiful place in a high rise building with a nice common area, great Japanese baths, and beer in the vending machines. My traveling companions went out on the town, but I stayed behind and starting drinking with a couple of guys I had just met, an Australian and an Irish, both of whom were also law students traveling on the cheap. I seem to recall talking about Regina v. Dudley and Stephens, which every law student in every common law country studies in his first year. Since it involves cannibalism, I'm sure the conversation went south from there.
Anyway, at some point a shell-shocked-looking woman about our age sat down at our table uninvited. She was wearing the sort of black cotton dress that seemed de rigueur among European "budget travellers" in the Eighties, and she looked absolutely stricken. We said "hello," and she announced "I've just come from Tehran." Then out came the story. Apparently she had gotten on a long-distance bus in Istanbul, destination New Delhi. Notwithstanding the horrendous countries in between (Iran and Pakistan, at a minimum -- I can't remember whether the route included Soviet-occupied Afghanistan), this seemed like a good idea to her, because the ticket was very cheap (I seem to recall she said it cost her $26), and who would want to miss out on traveling across south-central Asia by bus?
She only got as far as Tehran. Whether because she was British or merely a Western female of obviously loose morals, the Iranian officials at the Tehran bus station started giving her a very hard time in a very threatening way. I was under the impression that some form of sexual battery was involved, but she was vague on that part (and who wouldn't be, pouring out the story to three male university students with a big pile of "dead soldiers" in front of them).
In the middle of this ugly scene, a Japanese businessman intervened in her defense. He apparently grabbed her away from the abusive Iranians and persuaded them in some fashion to leave her alone. I have long wondered why they would have relented, but perhaps they were worried about offending a Japanese because Japan was just about the only rich and civilized country that would trade with revolutionary Iran. In any case, he then turned to the woman and said "you've got to get out of Iran immediately," marched her to the Japan Air Lines office and bought her a ticket on the next flight to Tokyo. So here she was, in Tokyo for no reason other than it was not Iran, with all of $70 to her name. Her best plan for solving her new predicament was to hunt down an ex-boyfriend who she thought was living somewhere in southern Japan. I'm sure he was glad to get her phone call.
When she finished this rather harrowing story, the Australian and the Irish burst out laughing. I, on the other hand, managed to control my facial expressions and express vague sympathy of some sort, although I seem to recall observing that Japanese men's clubs paid Western women to have sex on stage, $500 per "act," which was a lot of money at 220 yen to the dollar. Point was, one gross evening and she would have her ticket home. She didn't dismiss the idea out of hand, but that may just have been British reserve.
Anyway, she gave me the poster, which she says she removed from the wall in the ladies room at the Tehran bus terminal. And, no, I have no idea what happened to her, but I do wonder what she thinks the West should do about Ahmadinejad's Iran today.
21 Comments:
By 
, at
Sat Nov 04, 10:53:00 AM:
I have always found Iran to be a far, far creepier place than Iraq. Even though he was clearly nuts in some ways, I always got the impression that Saddam's Iraq was at the bottom a rational actor, which analyzed the costs and benefits of its actions to some degree and would not pursue what seemed to it an obviously suicidal course. I have never had any such confidence in Iran, which makes it a much more dangerous opponent. I'm sure this had something to do with Iraq's secular "government" and Iran's status as a theocracy, which I inherently deeply mistrust.
This has made the Bush administration's ill-informed and mistake-ridden regime-change-and-nation-building mission in Iraq all the more puzzling to me. If you really wanted to improve the safety and stability in the region, while eliminating a REALLY BIG safe haven and source of funding for terrorists, the obvious target is Iraq's next door neighbor. If you can only explain the choice of targets of the militaristic neocons in power by pointing at faulty intelligence, then that is truly unfortunate. I don't think history will be kind to the Bush regime.
By 
Mark in Texas, at
Sat Nov 04, 11:36:00 AM:
I used to work with a fellow who was born in India but who's parents were Zoroastrians from Iran. He had bought tickets way in advance to visit his folks in Bombay with a stopover in Iran to visit relatives in Iran. Between the time he bought the tickets and his departure date the Shah was overthrown and Khomeni took over.
Since this guy was not going to pass up a bargain air fare in order to reschedule, he went to Iran. One of the must see attractions that his relatives took him to see was the square outside the American embassy. Most of the day it was a kind of bazar / street fair with all kinds of vendors. Once a day, at the same time every day, the international TV crews would come out for the show. All the vendors would pack up their wares and grab signs. Everybody would hop up and down screaming "Death to America" and then the TV cameras would go away and the street fair would go back to normal.
He had a pretty good time there until it was time to leave. His relatives dropped him off at the airport and sped away. For a couple of tense hours he was grilled by a bunch of illiterate bearded teenagers with guns. He said that he was ready to get on a plane to anywhere just to get out of that place. Eventually, they got tired of screwing with him and let him get on the plane to India.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Nov 04, 11:55:00 AM:
Re: The experience of the British woman in Iran
Her experience was her own fault. She should have done her homework first.
Even today I see female European tourists--for example, Dutch women in Bandung, Indonesia--trying to wear shorts in Islamic countries. When the women walk on the streets, local residents will sometimes hit the legs of these women with a switch.
When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Corny, I know. But it still applies.
By skipsailing, at
Sat Nov 04, 12:15:00 PM:
Phrizz, it's comments like yours that lead me to despair for the nice folks at Rand McNally.
Go.
Buy.
A.
Map.
Magellan.
Look at it carefully. I know this will be tough for you. But try to find A stan and Iran and Iraq.
See a pattern there?
I didn't think so.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Nov 04, 12:40:00 PM:
Mark in Texas: "For a couple of tense hours he was grilled by a bunch of illiterate bearded teenagers with guns."
A folded $50 bill here and a folded $100 bill there eliminates delays in the poorer Islamic countries.(The Indonesians call it "speed money." The whole thing is nothing more than capitalism in action.)
Personally I always feel safe in corrupt Muslim countries. It is nice to know I can buy my way out of almost any problem.
By , at
Sat Nov 04, 03:54:00 PM:
DEC: Here's the problem. One day you won't be able to "buy your way" out of something bad, then there is no rule of law to help.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Nov 04, 04:10:00 PM:
No doubt about it, SR. It would be nice to live in a perfect world. Feel free to lecture the poor in the Islamic world about the rule of law. I'll simply slip them a hundred bucks and be on my way.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun Nov 05, 09:14:00 AM:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun Nov 05, 09:36:00 AM:
Under the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, bribing foreign officials to obtain or retain business is illegal.
However, making "facilitating payments for "routine governmental actions" outside the U.S. is legal.
The U.S. Justice Dept. says, "There is an exception to the antibribery prohibition for payments to facilitate or expedite performance of a 'routine governmental action.' The statute lists the following examples: obtaining permits, licenses, or other official documents; processing governmental papers, such as visas and work orders; providing police protection, mail pick-up and delivery; providing phone service, power and water supply, loading and unloading cargo, or protecting perishable products; and scheduling inspections associated with contract performance or transit of goods across country."
The Arabs call such payments Baksheesh [backsheesh, bakshis]. Baksheesh is part of their culture.
Government employees in many countries don't earn enough to even pay for the basic necessities. Without "extra money," their families would starve.
This is not the same thing as paying bribes or kickbacks to some key government official in exchange for contracts. As I said, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act makes it unlawful for Americans to bribe foreign government officials to obtain or retain business.
Paying "speed money" in many poor countries is no different than tipping a bellboy at a U.S. hotel.
To lecture such countries about how they should do things is a form of "cultural imperialism." Cultural imperialism is one reason the U.S. is hated in so many countries around the world.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sun Nov 05, 02:54:00 PM:
"To lecture such countries about how they should do things is a form of "cultural imperialism." Cultural imperialism is one reason the U.S. is hated in so many countries around the world."
Oh really? And when they lecture us about our sinful ways and how we are doomed to eternal hellfire because our women wear mini-skirts and drive cars by themselves, what would you call it?
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun Nov 05, 04:17:00 PM:
So you want to be just like your enemies, Dawnfire82?
I can tell by your comments on this blog as well as on your own blog that while you are a big booster of America, you don't seem to be a big booster of democratic ideals.
Here is a quote from your own blog (posted on 8 Sep 06, talking about the UN): "If the rules don't work for us, we will change (or ignore) the rules. Future international political battles will take place where they belong; behind closed doors."
In my view. that statement is imperialistic and undemocratic in the extreme.
By , at
Sun Nov 05, 08:35:00 PM:
Their lectures aren't imperialism. They're meaningless criticism for the benefit of domestic audiences.
The thing that makes "imperialism" imperialism is the power behind the "lectures". We have exponentially more power to alter/interfere with their culture then they have to alter our culture. Right-wing dystopian fantasies about Sharia in the US notwithstanding.
That said, by that same measure,if we lecture against forced female circumcision, stoning of rape victims, etc., I think that's a form of cultural imperialism we can all support.
JK
By Mark in Texas, at
Mon Nov 06, 07:38:00 AM:
DEC
The problem was that at that particular point in time it was an idealistic revolutionary Muslim country. My friend had heard a number of stories from his relatives about people being shot for offering bribes. He knew how the system worked and he knew how to offer mordita with tact. Today a bribe would be fine. Back in the time a few months after Khomeni had taken over it might have gotten him killed.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Mon Nov 06, 01:00:00 PM:
I totally agree, Mark in Texas. Thank you for taking the time to provide the additional information.
By , at
Mon Nov 06, 01:12:00 PM:
"In my view. that statement is imperialistic and undemocratic in the extreme."
In my view there's nothing democratic about the UN to start with, so there's nothing undemocratic in using it as everyone else does.
Beat this through your head: It isn't a world government, and never will be, allah willing.
By , at
Mon Nov 06, 01:17:00 PM:
Moreover, to lecture other countries is not imperialism, it is free expression.
So, here's some more free expression:
The Islamic world is backwards. Apologia won't move it forward...and moral relativism as it is practiced today is a bunch of horse manure for people who think they're own rights are immoveable, everyone else's negotiable.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Mon Nov 06, 01:59:00 PM:
To MIR:
World government? I would opt for no government first, MIR. I believe in the traditional American principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace.
The global economy is rapidly reaching the point where countries no longer have to do business with the U.S. to prosper. In the case of the U.S., more and more countries no longer have to follow the "golden rule"--the people who have the gold (Americans) make the rules. Think about that.
All things equal, people do business with their friends. All things unequal, people still do business with their friends. America needs more friends.
Do you think you can get along economically without those other countries? Most of America's factories are gone forever. The U.S. is at the point where one company--Boeing--accounts for roughly nine percent of America's exports.
You said: "The Islamic world is backwards."
Parts of the Islamic world are backwards. Parts of the Islamic world are as elegant, or more elegant, than anything you have in the U.S. After all, the "GDP per capita" is higher in the United Arab Emirates than it is in the U.S.
Take a look at the Emirates Place hotel:
http://www.emiratespalace.com/
Right now Dubai is building the world's tallest skyscraper. Are they using Americans companies to put it up? Nope. Asian companies are building it.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Mon Nov 06, 03:29:00 PM:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Mon Nov 06, 07:01:00 PM:
Correction: That should read "Emirates Palace Hotel"
http://www.emiratespalace.com/
Sorry for the typos in my last comment. I was in a hurry to get to a meeting.
By Dawnfire82, at
Tue Nov 07, 12:48:00 AM:
"So you want to be just like your enemies, Dawnfire82?"
You've completed avoided my question/point, and changed the subject completely. Hmph.
"I can tell by your comments on this blog as well as on your own blog that while you are a big booster of America, you don't seem to be a big booster of democratic ideals.
Here is a quote from your own blog (posted on 8 Sep 06, talking about the UN): "If the rules don't work for us, we will change (or ignore) the rules. Future international political battles will take place where they belong; behind closed doors."
In my view. that statement is imperialistic and undemocratic in the extreme."
While I'm flattered that you took the time to visit my little page, which I haven't updated in months, that has absolutely nothing to do with democratic/imperialistic anything.
Nations act in their own best interest. Period. Those who do not cease to be nations as they fall victim to those that do. Anarchy of nations, et cetera, that has always existed since the dawn of organized states. Classical enlightnment thinking.
So if you really want to apply the label, yeah, it's undemocratic. I guess. Since, you know, we're a sovereign power and everything. With an elected government. Whose officials are supposed to promote our (American) interests. But I don't think that the refusal of our elected officials to have our national policy guided by foreign powers is 'undemocratic.' Consider that an interpretation.
Odd irony. Somehow, I think that to you our own attempts to force OUR wills on other nations would be 'imperialistic' and their resistance justified, but our own resistance to similar forces is 'undemocratic.' Hah.
But it's weird that you dropped that particular quotation of mine, while ignoring the immediately following context and explanation. Allow me to repeat myself...
"I can already hear people whining about how that makes the US a 'unilateral' rogue nation. Well, they're right, sort of. If it is in our national interest to ignore 'the rules' then we will do so, as we have in the past. The thing is, so will everyone else. France can land troops in a west African nation or ruthlessly slaughter people in Algeria without asking permission, the Russians can storm and burn Chechnyan cities and extort Ukraine with its energy resources without going through international processes, the Chinese can threaten to (or actually) invade its neighbors like Tibet and Vietnam and Taiwan without the blessings of the UN... why can't the US topple an enemy power who violated a cease-fire by firing on our forces and broke the WMD clauses, attempted to assassinate a US President, and was a chief supporter of international terrorism?"
Point: Other powers ignore the United Nations when it is in their interests to do so. After all, it's almost totally powerless. We're willing to do the same. I was expressing relief.
Does that make all of those powers undemocratic and imperialistic in the extreme too?
In the half-cooked way mentioned above, yes. The world is not a democracy. It is an arena.
Welcome to the international reality.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Tue Nov 07, 02:50:00 AM:
Dawnfire82: "While I'm flattered that you took the time to visit my little page..."
I always get a kick out of reading your stuff. I told you that before.
